With Respect To Assessment Year 1992-93 v. Shaheen Engineers (P)Ltd.,2[Nd] Floor, Shakti Commercial

MISC. APPEAL No.472 OF 2000 (Against the order dated 17.4.2000 passed by Single Member of Income- tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in I.T.A.No.96/Pat/1998 with respect to assessment year 1992-93) ----------- 1.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, PATNA 2.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-I (3), PATNA------------ ---------- Appellants. Versus SHAHEEN ENGINEERS (P)LTD.,2 FLOOR, SHAKTI COMMERCIAL COMPLEX, BORING ROAD, PATNA----------------Respondent. --------- For the Appellants : Mr.Rishi Raj Sinha, Advocate. For the Respondent : None. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ---------- Prasad & Ranjan, JJ: This appeal was admitted for hearing by order dated 24.3.2004 on the following substantial question of law : “Whether the direction of the Tribunal to the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment on the basis of completed contract is according to law or not in view of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of State Bank of Travancore Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala, reported in 158 ITR page 102.” In fairness to Mr.Rishi Raj Sinha, he states that the tax effect in the present appeal is less than the monetary limits fixed by the Central Board of Direct Taxes for filing appeal by the department. A Division Bench of this Court had the occasion to consider this aspect in Miscellaneous Appeal No.90 of 2000 (Commissioner of Income Tax & anr. Versus Uma Kant Mishra), in which after taking into account the provisions of Section 268A of the Income Tax Act held that the appeal is incompetent. In the said case, it was observed as follows : “It is worth mentioning that the instruction of the Central Board of Direct Taxes dated 28.10.1992 shall be deemed to have been issued under section 268A (1) of the Income Tax Act in view of section 268A (5) of the Act. Thus the instruction dated 28.10.1992 fixing monetary limit for filing appeal has statutory flavour and in the back ground thereof we are of the opinion that these appeals are incompetent.” The case in hand is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Uma Kant Mishra (supra). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal on the aforesaid ground alone. There shall be no order as to costs. (Chandramauli Kr.Prasad, J.) ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.) Patna High Court, Dated, 20[th] of November,2008. NAFR/Narendra